sounds like Matt James would like to see players hit 90% of the time. Also having a fixed damage for attacks. seems like many of game designers have a problem with probability. may be that their is a real fear of uncertainty. remember rpgs are not board games and the rules do not equate to the whole of the game.

Quote from: steelmax73;375096sounds like Matt James would like to see players hit 90% of the time. Also having a fixed damage for attacks. seems like many of game designers have a problem with probability. may be that their is a real fear of uncertainty. remember rpgs are not board games and the rules do not equate to the whole of the game.

That article looks like it was actually written by Chris Sims, who is/was working at WotC.

http://twitter.com/ChrisSSims
http://community.wizards.com/chris_sims

EDIT:  Chris Sims was one of the guys that was purged in the xmas 2009 WotC layoffs.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/268912-wizards-coast-layoffs-rob-heinsoo-logan-bonner-chris-sims.html

Hmm, seems to be a issue with 50% hit chance eh? I appreciate them trying to have streamlined mechanics but at the cost of probability issues.

Older editions had iterative attacks for non casters so it helped. Spell casters auto hit while the target rolled for defensive action instead.

If 5e goes towards making the PCs hit often or auto hit even, but dealt damage/effects that can be reduced by enemies, then eventually the attack system for D&D will be completely be different, almost to a point of a new game.

But that's just me thinking out loud.

Quote from: areola;375108If 5e goes towards making the PCs hit often or auto hit even, but dealt damage/effects that can be reduced by enemies, then eventually the attack system for D&D will be completely be different, almost to a point of a new game.

But that's just me thinking out loud.

I wouldn't read too much into the musings of a guy who isn't at WotC any more. Not that Chris Sims isn't a good designer, but if it's indicative of anything, it's indicative of directions he wasn't allowed to go while he was there.

Quote from: Imperator;374934It never ceases to amaze me how some people (not you, ggroy) may think that somehow there are some ways of pretending to be a gay-ass elf that are 'manlier' than others.

Oh, please.

It's not about machismo, Imperator. It's about how challenging the game is to play. Going from save versus death to save versus suck to, "I don't even want to be inconvenienced!" reduces the challenges presented by during play.

I like the New York Times crossword puzzle because it's usually more difficult to complete than the one in my local paper. If I finish the NYT puzzle I don't beat my chest over it, nor do I think it makes me more attractive to women or causes other men to piss themselves in my presence. It's just more fun to do.

Quote from: Imperator;374934Also, I'm quite mystified by the notion that one must 'endure' some things to get the fun, and that there is some hard work that needs to be done to be a real gamer. What's wrong with the game being fun from minute one for some people?

Because fun isn't necessarily pushing the "WIN!" button.

Quote from: Haffrung;375018Actually,  missing a turn is not part of modern boardgame designs. I spend a lot more time playing boardgames and hanging out on Boardgamegeek than I do with RPGs, and I can tell you that 4E is clearly driven by modern boardgame design principals. And one of those principals is that all players should be involved at all times, with a minimum of downtime. Games where players miss a turn or have to wait a few minutes to take a turn are derided as moronic anachronisms.

That's an interesting observation and comparison.

Quote from: Benoist;375059Morrus' Players should play more Call of Cthulhu, IMO.

I think they should play Candyland.

Get stuck on licorice, lose a turn. Draw the Gingerbread Man card, and you go back nearly to the beginning of the board, no matter where your game piece is when you draw it.

My five-year-old and three-year-old are more tolerant of adversity in game-play than Morrus' players, it would seem.

Seriously: can you imagine these guys playing CoC, making Sanity checks and actually failing them? How about getting OWNED by nearly every creature of the Mythos? "But but... if we meet it, it has to be challenging, but fair, right? We can take it down! We SHOULD be able to!" RIIIIGHT. Party? Meet Yog-Sothoth. Yog-Sothoth? Meet party.

Quote from: The Shaman;375126My five-year-old and three-year-old are more tolerant of adversity in game-play than Morrus' players, it would seem.

Ouch.

(Candyland is one of those games looked down upon by the Forg^H^H^H Eurogamer set, right?)

There are many different kind of challenges though. There is the challenge of surviving the adventure through excellent tactics, saving the princess and earing lots of gold.

But there is also the challenge of getting into a fictional character's head and portraying that character in a consistent and true way. In those instances where you win or lose the scenario, whether you start competent or grow into it kind of fade into second place.

And the there is the game that doesn't take itself too seriously. You want to kick mosnter butt; the challenge isn't so much winning, it's about doing it in stlye (or in the case of Paranoia, dying in style).

Come on people, let's not suffocate the hobby with narrow definitions. What does that gain us except for more flames?

Quote from: Soylent Green;375144But there is also the challenge of getting into a fictional character's head and portraying that character in a consistent and true way.

Except there are no metrics to determine this.  Do you lose XP if you don't feel like talking in your funny voice this week?  Rough day at work, and you aren't quite the flamboyant Bard tonight is counted as a 'loss'?

This is entirely rife with that fiat that story game fans seem to hate with the fury of a thousand suns when the GM does it.  How is it different when the group does it as a whole?  Now you have to pixel bitch with five players instead of just the one.

It's great that people have fun this way, but wouldn't it be easier to try out for some local amateur plays instead of trying to shoehorn rules into it?  Where is the challenge in having your Dwarf say "Aye, lad!" in a thick Scottish accent all the time?

Quote from: StormBringer;375149Except there are no metrics to determine this.  Do you lose XP if you don't feel like talking in your funny voice this week?  Rough day at work, and you aren't quite the flamboyant Bard tonight is counted as a 'loss'?

This is entirely rife with that fiat that story game fans seem to hate with the fury of a thousand suns when the GM does it.  How is it different when the group does it as a whole?  Now you have to pixel bitch with five players instead of just the one.

It's great that people have fun this way, but wouldn't it be easier to try out for some local amateur plays instead of trying to shoehorn rules into it?  Where is the challenge in having your Dwarf say "Aye, lad!" in a thick Scottish accent all the time?

Nonsense. If I paint a picture, what is the metric of my success?

Roleplaying game sare as much a creative endevor as they are a game. Different groups mix the two ingredienets in different proportions and as such not all people enjoy all style of roleplaying.

Why is that so hard to accept?  Why must we all bow to one universal orthodoxy?

And no, it would not be easier to join a local amatuer theatre group, playing a character some other person wrote, rehearsing the same script day in day out. You are just being silly.

Quote from: Soylent Green;375144There are many different kind of challenges though.

Yes, but while that might make an interesting discussion in its own right, it's not pertinent to this topic.

This is about the specific kinds of challenges, backed by game mechanics, presented by games and how they've been made less formidable in successive editions, to the point where even delaying a character and missing a turn as a player is now considered excessive by some.

Quote from: The Shaman;375161This is about the specific kinds of challenges, backed by game mechanics, presented by games and how they've been made less formidable in successive editions, to the point where even delaying a character and missing a turn as a player is now considered excessive by some.

By Morrus' players, anyhow. The general consensus of the thread over there is very similar to the consensus here: namely, his players should stop expecting everything to be easy.

Quote from: Soylent Green;375153Nonsense. If I paint a picture, what is the metric of my success?

Like most painters, you would die penniless only to have your work discovered 75 or 100 years later and sold for millions of dollars.

QuoteRoleplaying game sare as much a creative endevor as they are a game. Different groups mix the two ingredienets in different proportions and as such not all people enjoy all style of roleplaying.

Luckily, no one here is saying any different.

QuoteWhy is that so hard to accept?  Why must we all bow to one universal orthodoxy?

Who is making this demand, exactly?  If you consider them to be ROLE PLAYING games, you really shouldn't expect to have much common ground with people who considers them role playing GAMES.  Don't wander in and pitch a fit about oppression while demanding external validation.  I dig the shit out of Nobilis, but I realize it isn't a very popular game (especially around here), and I don't demand equal representation from theRPGsite based on my choice to play Nobilis instead of Amber.

Everyone can have all the opinions they want, no matter how crazy, if they keep them private.  I don't care about those, and I wouldn't even know about them anyway.  But if you trot them out for the public to see, someone will disagree with you.  Full stop.  You do not get universal accolades simply for holding a position.

QuoteAnd no, it would not be easier to join a local amatuer theatre group, playing a character some other person wrote, rehearsing the same script day in day out. You are just being silly.

Write your own play.  Write a book.  Start a collaborative writing group.  There are thousands of things to do when you want to exercise your creativity without shackling it to a set of arbitrary rules that are not even remotely designed for free-form writing.

Let me ask again:
Do you lose XP if you don't feel like talking in your funny voice this week?
Rough day at work, and you aren't quite the flamboyant Bard tonight is counted as a 'loss'?
Where is the challenge in having your Dwarf say "Aye, lad!" in a thick Scottish accent all the time?

In other words, you are stripping out just about every element that contributes to the game part.  Nobody here cares what you do at your table.  Honestly, we don't.  But you are talking to a bunch of people who are quite enamoured with the game part.  Even worse for you, though, is that you seem to think the rest of us have no idea there is a 'role playing' component.    Of course we know about that part!  We just don't put as much emphasis it, as discussions revolving around 'better role playing' are usually just tips from the most recent local amateur fiction writer's club meeting.  I trust you to know what is most enjoyable for your group; if it is 100% play acting and no rules, go for it.  But know your audience if you want to take it public.

You are arguing against a position no one here is defending.